Alternate Routes to Getting Certified As A Teacher

INTRODUCTION

With both high retirement and high attrition rates among K-12 teachers and a burgeoning student population nationwide, more teachers are needed. Yet if we are to turn around schools in need of improvement, help all students meet rigorous academic standards, and close the achievement gap, simply getting more teachers into the profession will not suffice. As reflected in the No Child Left Behind requirement that all teachers of the academic subjects be highly qualified, new teachers must be equipped with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to teach to high standards and to be effective with the increasingly diverse array of students in today's classrooms. Moreover, a good number of these newcomers must commit and be able to teach in hard-to-staff content areas and in our most challenging schools. In short, the challenge to the profession is to prepare and retain greater numbers of high-quality teachers.

Expanding the education workforce at the necessary pace while also ensuring that teachers are effective and motivated to stay on the job requires new ways of recruiting, training, and supporting teacher candidates. We cannot rely exclusively on traditional teacher preparation programs to ratchet up their efforts. We need to develop new routes to teacher certification, giving more candidates more access through high-quality alternative teacher preparation programs designed to meet local needs.

"Alternative" in what ways? Instead of drawing primarily from the traditional pool of teacher preparation candidates which consists mainly of college students and recent graduates, alternative route programs cast a broader net, making efforts to attract older, non-traditional candidates who come to the program already well-versed in the content they want to teach.

This category includes midcareer individuals and middle-aged retirees from other professions. Instead of requiring participants to follow the traditional teacher preparation pattern of academic course work and supervised student teaching before taking over a classroom, alternative programs move candidates into their own classrooms after a short period of training. Candidates continue their studies at night and on weekends and receive structured mentoring and support while they teach.

Because novice educators in these programs can begin teaching-and drawing a salary and benefits-so quickly, the programs are able to attract candidates whose financial obligations might rule out the slower traditional route to teaching. For similar reasons they can appeal to classroom paraprofessionals with degrees who, in addition to needing a salary, may want to teach in the school where they now work, something alternative programs are more likely to facilitate.¹ In fact, most alternative route teacher preparation programs are location-specific. Unlike traditional university-based programs, alternative programs tend to be created by a local partnership for the express purpose of preparing teachers to meet the needs of the local school district(s).

This guide looks at these new routes to teacher certification as they play out in six programs in different states, examining how these initiatives go about recruiting strong candidates and ensuring that their teachers are well-equipped to serve today's students. (Basic statistics about these sites appear in figure 1.)

The Movement Toward Alternatives

One impetus for alternative preparation programs has been the teacher shortage experienced in many locales. Along with teacher retirements, high attrition among novice educators, and student enrollment growth, other contributing factors include class-size-reduction policies and a salary schedule that does not provide incentives to teach in hard-to-staff subjects or schools. Shortages are especially acute in urban areas, special education, and in certain content areas such as mathematics and science. And among those candidates who do take teaching jobs, many don't stay long. About 9 percent of new teachers (those in their first three years on the job) left teaching at the end of the 2000-01 school year, a percentage that has been increasing over the last decade.²

Figure 1. Six Alternative Routes to Teacher Certification

Given this situation, many school districts have turned to bringing in uncredentialed teachers on emergency permits. Such individuals may have the potential to be good teachers, but too often they have been left to "sink or swim," with support that is insufficient, inconsistent, or nonexistent. And these least-prepared teachers are most likely to be in schools with concentrations of low-performing students-—the very students most in need of effective teaching.³

Quality concerns have also driven the alternative route movement. States and schools have been frustrated as they watch talented individuals say yes to teaching in private schools and charter schools because of the high cost and other hurdles they would have to overcome to be certified to teach in a traditional public school.

In between traditional programs and emergency permits lies the diverse and growing world of alternative route programs. In 2004, 43 states plus the District of Columbia reported having some type of alternative route for certifying teachers, while only 8 states said they had such routes in 1983 when the National Center for Education Information began collecting such data. In states like California, New Jersey, and Texas that have been pursuing alternative routes since the mid-1980s, 20 percent or more of new teachers enter the profession through alternative routes; Texas offers 52 separate routes.⁴

The term "alternative route" has been used for everything from unstructured help for individuals on emergency permits to sophisticated, well-designed programs. The National Center for Alternative Certification posts state-by-state listings of alternative route programs and now has a typology of over 10 different kinds.⁵ Fortunately, the Center reports an emerging consensus on required features that closely resembles critical features identified by researchers ⁶:

• The program has been specifically designed to recruit, prepare, and license talented individuals who already have at least a bachelor's degree.
• Candidates pass a rigorous screening process.
• The program is field-based.
• The program includes course work or equivalent experiences while teaching.
• Candidates work closely with mentor teachers.
• Candidates must meet high performance standards for completion of the program.

Alternative routes allow people such as career changers and those who have been out of the job market (e.g., stay-at-home mothers) and who hold at least a college degree to transition into teaching without the hardship of leaving the paid workforce or the expense and possible redundancy of traditional teaching programs. The new programs have the potential to attract a range of talented individuals who previously might not have made the shift, including those who want to be in certain urban or rural settings and those who believe traditional programs lack grounding in actual classroom experience. And they can meet the needs of a specific local setting, training people close to home, where they are likely to stay.

This guide profiles what six established alternative programs look like, whom they attract, and how they put into practice features like those listed above. They model commitment, ingenuity, and a variety of practices from which others may learn.

Case Study Sites and Methodology

The six programs highlighted in this guide are: the Alternative Certification Program, Hillsborough County, Fla.; the Educator Certification Program, Region XIII, Austin, Tex.; the Georgia Teacher Alternative Preparation Program, Northwest Regional Educational Service Agency (RESA) and Metro RESA, Ga.; the New York City Teaching Fellows program, New York, N.Y.; the Northeastern California Partnership for Special Education, Chico, Calif.; and the Wichita Area Transition to Teaching program, Wichita, Kans. For a narrative summary of each site's context and program, see Part II of this guide.

These programs were selected from a larger pool of possible programs through the benchmarking methodology that underlies this study. Adapted from the four-phase benchmarking process used by the American Productivity & Quality Center, as well as general case study methodology, the study proceeded through several phases.

A study scope or conceptual framework (see figure 2 ) was developed at the beginning of the project to guide program selection and analysis. Developed from an examination of relevant research literature, the framework was reviewed and refined by a panel of experts.

Figure 2. Final Study Scope

Program Profile What are the overall goals of the program and its major components? What specific local needs does the program meet? What are the process and requirements for certification? What are the demographics of candidates and faculty in the program? What are the funding sources for the program? Recruitment and Selection What criteria are used to identify and select candidates? How are the candidates recruited? Does the program control the placement of candidates? What are the elements that make the selection process rigorous? Teacher Training: Content and Pedagogy What are the program performance standards for teachers and candidates? What content-based and pedagogical course work is required and when? How are content and pedagogy integrated in the program delivery? What specific strategies are taught for working with targeted student populations? In what ways is the program field-based? How is the program designed to meet the individual needs of the candidate? Mentoring, Supervision, and Support By what methods do mentors support candidates? What are the criteria for mentor/supervisor selection? How are mentors/supervisors recruited and trained? Program Monitoring and Evaluation How is teacher performance assessed? What program outcomes are monitored (e.g., retention rates)? How are program evaluation data and candidate feedback used to improve recruitment and program strategies?

Programs were sought that met four basic criteria: candidates enter the program with at least a bachelor's degree, candidates are teachers of record during training, the program has an established track record over three or more years, and it uses promising practices such as tailored, field-based programming and strong mentor support. Sixteen programs were screened using a weighted criteria matrix; the six programs highlighted in this publication had higher scores and represented a range of geographic locations and types of programs.

Data collection took place through one-day on-site visits; interviews with program administrators, faculty, current candidates, and graduates; and review of documentation. This guide is synthesized from a more comprehensive research report that includes case descriptions and cross-site analysis of key findings.

This descriptive research process suggests promising practices—ways to do things that others have found helpful, or lessons they have learned about what not to do-and practical "how-to" guidance. This is not the kind of experimental research that can yield valid causal claims about what works, so readers should judge the merits of these suggestions according to their understanding of the reasoning behind them and fit them to their local circumstances.

PART I: ELEMENTS OF PROMISING ALTERNATIVE ROUTE PROGRAMS

A successful alternative teacher preparation program attracts and selects the right candidates. It offers a carefully thought-out, research-based curriculum that is coherent and flexible. It provides effective support to candidates. And it is committed to its own continuous reflection and improvement. This section explains how.

Recruit Widely, Select Carefully


The rationale driving alternative route programs is that many excellent teacher candidates have made other life or career choices but would be open to becoming teachers if presented with the right offer. Because these preparation programs are created to address the specific teacher shortage(s) experienced in the districts they serve, their challenge is to identify the types of potential candidates who would best meet district needs and, then, make them an offer they can't refuse. But first programs have to get their attention. Thus, the recommendation, gleaned from the successful programs profiled in this guide, is to recruit widely and select carefully.

In light of the great need for specific subject-area teachers (e.g., in science),⁷ the recruitment efforts of most programs target individuals who are already steeped in the relevant content because they have majored in it and have been working in that field. Included in this category are many midcareer professionals and early retirees. This targeted approach reflects the mission statements of many alternative programs. For example, the program in Hillsborough County, Florida, seeks to "expand the pool of educators to include non-education majors committed to making a positive impact on student achievement and providing quality educational opportunities." New York City's program rests on a similar assumption, that "there is a substantial pool of talented individuals who have chosen other career options and who are capable of and interested in becoming excellent teachers."

While trying to recruit widely, programs must also be selective in the candidates they admit, ensuring that those who enter an alternative route program have the necessary knowledge, skills, and personality to quickly become effective teachers. So how does a program target its recruitment efforts to ensure a strong applicant pool from which to select tomorrow's best teachers? Successful programs have found a variety of ways.

Recruitment Approaches

The six programs represented here report that word of mouth is by far their most effective recruitment tool, particularly because it typically yields candidates who are similar to previously successful candidates. Moreover, satisfied candidates and school systems are likely to spread the word without any special effort on the part of their program. Other, less personal advertising approaches, such as radio and television spots and local newspaper advertisments, have also proven fruitful, especially for newer programs. New York uses a print advertising campaign to inspire dissatisfied professionals to become teachers. Subway posters send provocative messages to burned-out or disillusioned professionals. "Tired of diminishing returns? Invest in NYC kids" was just one of many Madison Avenue-inspired invitations. News coverage has also proven to be a boon to alternative programs. When the New York Times, for example, ran a story about the district's alternative route program, 2,100 applications flooded in over the next six weeks.

Some programs target specific groups in their recruitment efforts. The Chico program, designed to increase the number of special education teachers in northeast California, deliberately targets groups that are underrepresented nationally among special education teachers (especially people with disabilities and men).

Information sessions and recruitment fairs are another way programs inform interested people about their alternative route processes. Such information sessions help potential applicants self-select, recognizing early whether the high demands of the alternative approach fit their skill and energy levels. The Hillsborough program hosts two large recruitment fairs each summer. Approximately 900 people attend these sessions. In New York, several information sessions prior to the application deadline provide those considering the program with the opportunity to speak with current candidates, a program recruiter, and other individuals involved in the alternative program. The sessions include a program overview, testimonials from current participants, and a question-and-answer period mediated by candidates and recruiters.

Selection Criteria

Once a highly motivated group of people has shown interest in becoming teachers, programs must decide how to manage the application and selection process to ensure that they get the best candidates in their programs. The first level of screening involves setting application requirements. All of the programs highlighted in this guide require applicants to have completed a bachelor's degree. Grade-point average (GPA) can also be used to set minimum standards; this requirement is typically set by university rather than other program partners. As the leaders of the New York program point out, GPA is not necessarily an indication of an applicant's ability to become an effective teacher. In general, traditional admissions criteria such as GPA and letters of recommendation are of little help when applicants are career changers or have been out of school for many years. (See figure 3 for program-by-program recruitment and selection criteria and steps.)

What may be most telling for alternative route program applicants are solid content knowledge and the ability, by virtue of life and work experience, to relate content to the real world. The rigorous nature and fast pace of these programs require that applicants have a high level of maturity and tenacity and a learning style that is a good fit with a "practice-to-theory" approach.

Selection Processes

Successful programs have selection processes and tools to help them identify applicants who have what it takes to succeed in classrooms as well as in the program. Communication with hiring districts and applicant interviews are key elements in making these determinations.

Figure 3. Candidate Recruitment and Selection

	Application Requirements	Selection Process
Alternative Certification Program/ Hillsborough County, Florida	Hold or be eligible for a temporary teaching certificate from the Florida Department of Education (requires a BA in the desired certific ation area) Paid instructional employee of Hillsborough County School Board or Board-approved charter school	Be identified by district as a qualified HCPS employee Submit the program application with hiring principal's signature
Educator Certification Program/Region XIII, Austin, Texas	BA with a 2.5 GPA Required course work and semester hours in desired certification area Evidence of competency in reading, writing, and mathematics Daily access to a computer, printer, and Internet connection 3 letters of recommendation	Gallup TeacherInsight ™ interview Satisfactory score on candidate selection matrix Input on application from Austin ISD (the region's largest employer)
Georgia Teacher Alternative Preparation Program (Northwest and Metro Regional Educational Service Agencies)/Georgia	BA with a 2.5 GPA Major in desired certification area Employed by a public school system Criminal background clearance Pass or exempt from Praxis I No teacher education program completed No teaching certificate	NW: Candidates are hired and screened by the school system Metro: Paper screening process (includes review of application, resume, 2 reference letters, transcripts, and "passing" a personality test) Interview Pass the Essentials of Effective Teaching course Secure a teaching position
New York City Teaching Fellows/ New York	BA with a 3.0 GPA U.S. citizen or permanent resident Speak English fluently No teacher education program completed No teaching certificate	Submit transcripts, resume, and personal statement Attend the interview-interaction File review process Receive regional placement and university assignment Pass two state-required exams
Northeastern California Partnership for Special Education/ Chico, California	BA with a 2.67 GPA Demonstration of subject mater competency Pass CBEST	Meet application requirements Haberman Star Teacher Selection Interview Satisfactory score on the interview rubric
Wichita Area Transition to Teaching/Wichita, Kansas	BA with a 2.5 GPA Major in desired certification area Same general education courses required of all other WSU teacher education students Minimum of two years' employment in a career related to their content specialty Admitted to the WSU graduate school	Transcript analysis Interview with program director Pass Pre-Professional Skills Tests in reading, writing, and mathematics Secure a teaching position

Each of the six alternative route programs in this guide has a different approach to placing candidates in the classroom. Some programs require that applicants have a job with one of their partner districts or a job offer contingent on their program participation. Other programs accept candidates whom they judge to be highly likely to find a placement on their own. Still other programs work directly with districts in making their selection decisions, with the goal being to fill chronic vacancies. No matter what approach is used, the program must have an excellent relationship with the school district(s) it serves. Program administrators must consistently place highly successful candidates; otherwise they cannot build the trust necessary to sustain the program. Successful placements are also key to building the kind of reputation that fuels highly desirable word-of-mouth recruitment.

The New York program's screening criteria narrow an annual pool of approximately 17,000 applicants down to around 1,900 candidates. Applicants who meet a first set of basic requirements are invited to sign up for a four-hour interview-interaction with trained selectors. During the interaction, applicants teach a five-minute sample lesson, produce a 20-minute writing sample, and participate in a 20-minute, one-on-one interview. The writing sample, a parent letter for example, is intended to reveal a candidate's critical-thinking and problem-solving skills, as well as communication skills. The one-on-one interview is an opportunity for a selector to follow up on any aspect of the lesson or writing sample and to ask additional questions so that the selector can make a well-informed recommendation. Selectors write a summary and rate each candidate they interview. Of the applicants who reach the interaction screening, approximately 45 percent are recommended by the selectors. The final step in the application process involves additional review of files by program staff and experienced selectors. About 10 percent of the applicants who make it to this stage are eliminated in the file review process.

A multistage selection process is also used by the program in Texas Region XIII. An applicant who meets the baseline requirements for this program participates in a highly structured interview, the Gallup TeacherInsight™, completed online during the application process. A program leader in the candidate's credential specialization develops an overall score for a candidate, incorporating the Gallup interview results, overall GPA, course work GPA, information from the applicant's references, and other comments and observations. The final score, combined with input from Region XIII, determines which applicants are selected for each cohort of candidates.

The interview is perhaps the single most important aspect of the selection process for the special education program in Chico. Every candidate who has met state-required prescreening criteria goes through a structured interview conducted by a program team. The interview instrument is inspired by the Star Teacher Selection Interview developed by the Haberman Educational Foundation—a scenario-based instrument to predict how teacher candidates would deal with challenging and even stressful situations. The interview helps to gauge such qualities as whether a person is persistent, is a problem solver, is protective of learners and learning, can translate theory into practice, and can use successful approaches with students who have characteristics that put them at risk for school failure. For the Chico program, the interview is tailored to rural special education teaching. It seeks to evaluate, for example, a candidate's reasons for becoming a teacher and working with exceptional children, prior commitment to exceptional children, and skills in communication and collaboration. This interview process also requires applicants to produce an essay. Program team members use a rubric to score the applicants, and only those above a high cutoff point are admitted to the program. As a program adviser notes, "The interview process makes it clear to candidates that this is a rigorous program. Before we used it, candidates would get into the program and then say, 'I had no idea this would be so hard.'"

Interviews are also part of the application process in the smaller programs that recruit and screen to meet specific local needs. The Wichita program uses a structured interview (see figure 4) and scoring rubric and the regional program in Texas conducts an interview with each applicant.


Design a Coherent, Flexible Program


The key to developing and maintaining an effective program is having knowledgeable, committed leadership—people who are clear about a community's teaching needs and visionary about how to address them. These leaders also know what learning experiences make for coherent preparation as well as how to meet their candidates' individual needs. And since most programs are partnerships, leaders must be able to create a structure for shared and responsive decision-making.

Of the programs in this guide, only Hillsborough operates without partners. The other programs involve multiple school jurisdictions and often include universities or other entities in their leadership structure. For example, the programs in Texas and Georgia have regional service centers at their hubs. New York, Chico, and Wichita all have strong university partnerships. In each partnership program, policy is set jointly and each partner contributes to the program in specific ways. In Chico, for instance, the university provides televised or Web-based courses, regional supervision, and separate course sections for candidates. Participating local schools guarantee candidates 10 paid release days each year to attend classes. The state's Commission on Teacher Credentialing and the federal Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services help underwrite candidates' tuition, the services of mentors and candidate adviser, and program coordination and evaluation. Chico program leaders routinely collect and analyze data and make recommendations for program fine-tuning to the broadly representative advisory board.

Such data collection and adaptability are seen by all the programs as crucial to their continuing effectiveness. Not only do these programs respond to changing local needs, but each program considers itself a work in progress, continuously reviewing how best to serve its candidates' and districts' needs. Alternative route program administrators aim to devise an artful combination of course work and support, a program that is coherent and flexible.

Figure 4. Wichita Structured Interview Form

Questions asked of all candidates 1 Why are you considering a career change to become a teacher? 2 What experiences have you had working with middle school or high school age students and diverse cultural groups? 3 What are the greatest challenges you expect to encounter as a new teacher? 4 Based on your past work experiences, what do you think past employers and co-workers would tell us about you as an employee? 5 If you were to teach for five years and leave teaching at that time, what is the single most important thing you would want your students to remember about you as their teacher? 6 Classroom discipline can be challenging to any teacher. What would you do in each of the following situations? Students failing to turn in assignments A student talking back A student caught cheating on an assignment or test A student constantly talking and not paying attention in class 7 If you were limited to three adjectives to describe yourself as a teacher what three would you choose and why? 8 If a student complained to you about another teacher not being fair, how would you handle this situation? 9 How important is it for a teacher to have a sense of humor? Explain your answer. 10 Have you ever had difficulty learning any subject material? If so what method did you use to overcome this difficulty? How would you help a student experiencing a similar difficulty in your class? 11 How will you go about making your subject relevant to your students? 12 I have asked you several questions about teaching and your desire to become a teacher. What questions would you like to ask me about the transition to teaching program?

Traditional Standards

Like traditional preparation programs, alternative programs must be accredited and must ensure that candidates gain the competencies they need to teach their students and to meet state credentialing requirements. The design of the programs studied—from candidate advising through preservice, curriculum, and on-the-job practice—is driven by state requirements, including those for the credential itself, standards for the teaching profession, and standards that drive the academic content encountered by K-12 students. Region XIII in Texas took an especially thorough approach to building a program around standards. Early on, the program experienced considerable variability across different cohort groups and instructors in what was being covered. Not wanting to lose the supportive cohort structure, program staff created a more fully specified curriculum. Using the "backward-design" principles and tools of Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe, they completed an extensive redevelopment process. They started by determining what the candidates would need to know and be able to do based on the state standards. They then determined what evidence candidates would have to produce to demonstrate having met the standards. Finally, they developed the learning activities intended to enable candidates to generate that evidence. Figure 5 illustrates one piece of the backward mapping process, which has guided the program's unit development and assessment. In using this process, says the program director, program staff have gained a much stronger understanding of the state standards themselves and, as a result, have been more effective in working with candidates.

Program leaders in Chico describe standards as the common language spoken by everyone in the program. Each candidate's individualized plan specifies which standards are being met through which courses or activities. Similarly, candidates' lesson plans have to meet teaching standards and student standards. And their portfolios and reflective logs are organized around which standards are being addressed or illustrated. In each supervisor visit to a candidate's site, the conversation focuses on which teaching standards are observed in that day's lesson and which still need to be addressed.

In Hillsborough, the components of candidates' eight required courses are designed to help them gain the knowledge, skills, and abilities to successfully demonstrate competency in Florida's 12 Accomplished Practices for teaching.

Untraditional Standards

While programs are traditional in their alignment with state standards, how their candidates meet those standards can vary widely. Programs studied range in length from one to three years. Each begins with a few days to several weeks of preservice training, after which candidates take on regular teaching positions. Candidates are bolstered by structured support and continue to take courses at night and on weekends. The goal at the end of each program is certification. In New York, candidates also earn a master's degree. Wichita candidates have an option to earn a master's degree.

Each program's preservice segment, regardless of duration, focuses on similar essentials. Typical is Georgia's 80-hour intensive course, which orients candidates to best practices in lesson planning, instruction, assessment, and classroom management, and provides them with field experiences and observations. Candidates also learn about teacher roles and responsibilities and the teaching code of ethics, as well as basics of parent communication and special education.

New York's seven-week summer preservice training involves both course work and student teaching to launch a master's degree program at any of the 11 partnering universities. During their preservice experience, candidates complete 90 hours of course work while simultaneously logging 80 hours of student teaching. At the end of each day, participants come together in groups of approximately 30 to meet with their fellow adviser; these meetings add up to about 75 hours of group support throughout the summer. In addition to being good teachers, fellow advisers are selected for their familiarity with alternative routes to certification and their skill in working with adults. These preservice advisers impart information and facilitate discussions intended to help program participants make sense of and mesh what they are learning in their course work and in their classroom teaching. To inform these sessions, the fellow advisers also observe candidates during their student teaching. Since the program's inception, participants have routinely identified these advisers as particularly helpful.

Figure 5. Region XIII Unit Planning Guide

Greater variation occurs in how and where candidates continue their course work once on the job, although nights and weekends are the norm. While Chico mixes in some release time, programs have run into the expense of hiring substitute teachers as well as candidates' objections to losing time with their students. In New York, in service schedules are created by each partnering university and courses typically are held in the evening or during the summer. In Hillsborough, district teachers teach courses in the evenings—an arrangement that fosters empathy since instructors and candidates alike have been teaching all day and experiencing common challenges. Hillsborough sets no order for taking the prescribed classes, which are offered at multiple evening and weekend times in multiple locations. In Texas, candidates receive 100 hours of in service training while they are on the job. The instruction is designed and delivered by the program's seven "education specialists," some of it via the Internet.

Online course delivery is a hallmark of Chico's two-year, special education-focused program, which serves an expansive rural area. Special education faculty, many of whom are classroom teachers, teach weekly evening courses, using real-time streaming video on the university's interactive distance education system. Despite drives as long as five hours, Chico candidates also come to the university and meet with their cohort for a full-day class each month using a release day. This face-to-face interaction on campus continues during the required summer school.

Individualized Approach

While all alternative route programs delineate course requirements and align their program with state standards, they also recognize the extra demands placed on their candidates. Unlike traditional teacher candidates, candidates are almost immediately on the job—with full responsibility for groups of students. Their course work sequence and the timing of support cannot be carved in stone. "They need everything at once," said one program coordinator, who—like leaders in all the programs studied—must balance that awareness against the reality that too much too soon is overwhelming.

Since most programs require that candidates demonstrate knowledge of subject matter to qualify for admission, the focus is typically not content knowledge but pedagogy—lessons and practice in how best to teach specific kinds of content to diverse groups of students. (Exceptions are New York's math immersion component, targeting non-math majors who will teach math, and the component of the Texas Region XIII program that helps candidates pass the state-required content knowledge examination.)

Each program offers candidates initial basic knowledge—say, in reading instruction or classroom management—and then follows up with more complex information and instruction at the moment the candidate needs it. The director of the alternative route program at Pace University—one of the partners in New York City—explains that alternative programs ground candidates' course work in their teaching and explore theory in practical terms. Similarly, an evaluator of the Chico program points out its pragmatic stance: "This approach is the reverse of traditional theory to practice," she says. "It's turned teaching upside down in university classrooms."

In Chico, the individualized approach begins with each candidate's Individualized Induction Program (IIP). Developed with a program supervisor, each IIP is a personal road map that documents a candidate's goals and tracks an action plan for achieving those goals. Candidates also sign a course contract that is forwarded to the university's credential analyst. To be sure candidates get the courses they need, and recognizing the stresses they are under, the program adviser monitors the candidates to make sure they sign up for the right classes—and to call them if they have not. "They get a lot of hand holding because they become so overwhelmed with teaching and taking course work," explains a Chico program adviser. Ongoing individual advisement addresses other university deadlines that Chico candidates have to meet, phone numbers they need, and general troubleshooting. "Tons of email," notes one program adviser, is the key to the ongoing personal support candidates receive from their instructors and advisers.

Other programs where candidates follow individualized programs include those in Hillsborough and Georgia. As in Chico, candidates' programs are tailored to their particular background and experience—and adjusted over time to address specific, individual needs.

Formative Assessment

Identification of individual needs in these alternative programs is made possible by the amount of ongoing assessment each candidate receives. This assessment approach models the kind of assessment candidates are learning to conduct with their own students. Generally, it includes formal and informal observations by program support providers and principals as well as the portfolios candidates develop over the course of the program. In Georgia, Hillsborough, and Chico, portfolios document candidates' growth in competencies aligned with state standards (see figure 6). Portfolios are also used as instruments for self-reflection and are tied to student learning. In Chico, for example, candidates' portfolios include samples of students' individualized lesson plans, plans that are driven by candidates' analyses of ongoing student assessment data and are then critiqued by supervisors, mentors, and the school that employs them. In Georgia, video clips document the candidate's classroom environment and instruction. Hillsborough has a particularly detailed structure for integrating assessment with support, as explained in the next section. Across the programs, a final sign-off on competencies generally involves support providers, the employer, and appropriate course instructors.

Michael McKibbin, consultant with the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing, who is in charge of California's alternative programs, points to a critical difference between the evaluation in traditional and alternative teacher preparation. In traditional programs, he notes, by the time a student teacher realizes he or she cannot perform a skill or task, it's too late. The benefit of alternative programs, he says, is that "performance assessment can be done over a long period of time, so that remediation and improvement can be applied and monitored."


Provide Extensive Support


The heart and soul of these high-quality alternative programs is the on-the-job supervision and support candidates receive as they face the daunting challenges of being a new teacher in what is often a very difficult classroom setting. In the programs studied, support is structured at three levels: (1) program-provided supervisors; (2) site-based mentors; and (3) peer cohort support. All six programs had some variation of these three, which interweave to form a new-teacher safety net. Rather than strand candidates to sink or swim, support structures ensure that candidates will fulfill their promise or, as McKibbin puts it, that "they will obtain the skills to succeed and the commitment to stay."

Figure 6. Georgia (RESA) Candidate Portfolio Contents

Domain and Areas Addressed* Examples of Documentation Domain I (Planning and Preparation) Competencies 1-7, e.g. Demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy, Demonstrating knowledge of students, Selecting instructional goals, Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources, Designing Coherent Instruction, Assessing Student Learning Lesson plans with acquisition lessons and the components, extending and refining lessons, examples of differentiated strategies, graphic organizers, and authentic tasks and assessments Domain II (Classroom Environment) (Competencies 8-12) Include video clips documenting the candidate's classroom environment and culture of learning, a classroom floor plan and rationale, student rules, Glasser's Choice Theory Implementation, and a discipline plan Domain III (Managing Student Behavior) (Competencies 13-18) Include video clips documenting instruction, observation records documenting mentor and RESA observations, examples of student work from various levels of achievement, copies of candidate's written feedback to students, and examples of lesson modification Domain IV (Professional Responsibilities) (Competencies 19-24) Include copies of administrator's evaluations, documentation of participation in school and community activities * Framework based on Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching (ASCD, 1996)

On-Site Supervision

All of these programs include direct and indirect support. Direct support comes in the form of classroom observations, done by the program (or university) supervisor, the mentor (who is often an experienced teacher at the candidate's site), or a school administrator, such as the principal, who has partnered with the program to provide such support.

In Georgia, mentors observe frequently, give candidates feedback, and act as role models by coaching and demonstrating lessons. They also arrange for candidates to visit and observe in other classrooms.

In Hillsborough, the coaching cycle is key to the program. Because candidates can enter at different times during the year, the program is organized into a series of observation-and-coaching "loops" within three cycles or phases, as depicted in figure 7. Within weeks 1-2, for example, the support provider—the candidate's program administrator—conducts a preobservation conference to schedule observation times and introduce the candidate to the Florida Performance Measurement System instrument. Observations will be based on Florida's Accomplished Practices for Educators, and the administrator will use this instrument in evaluating the candidate on those practices. The candidate will self-assesses on the same competencies. After the initial observation has taken place, the administrator and the candidate, together with a trained peer teacher, write an action plan to determine methods and time lines for addressing competencies that have not been successfully demonstrated. This plan guides subsequent observations and conferences and is updated at the end of each cycle.

Chico supervisors are also course instructors, ensuring that there is no disconnect between course work and classroom practice. As one Chico supervisor explains, "I know what's being taught in reading courses, and if I go out and see that it's not happening, I say, 'You just finished the course—where is it?'" On-site support is planned but also highly individualized—tailored according to Chico candidates' individualized plans and expressed needs. And the support team—supervisors, mentors, and school administrators—zeroes in on potential crises. "Need someone there next Tuesday?" queries another Chico supervisor. "We'll make that happen. We do visits on top of visits."

In all of the programs, support is carefully coordinated. In Georgia, supervisors facilitate regular reporting and communication. In Hillsborough, principals take that role. In Chico, it's the university supervisors, each regionally assigned and working with 10 to 15 mentors and roughly the same number of candidates. As they follow their candidates and link with mentors throughout the four semesters, Chico supervisors also communicate and develop rapport with school principals and other district or county education administrators.

Figure 7. Hillsborough Three-Cycle Observation Schedule

Cycle I- 18 weeks Cycle II- 9 weeks Cycle III- 9 weeks Weeks 1-2 Identify ACP support staff Weeks 19-28 Conduct 3 observations Week 29 Write Cycle III Action Plan Pre-observation conference Review Cycle II Alternative Certification Professional Development Plan (ACPDP) Weeks 30-37 Conduct 2 observations Complete screening instruments   Final Summative Assessment Write Cycle I Action Plan   Weeks 3-4 Conduct 2 observations Review Cycle I Alternative Certification Professional Development Plan (ACPDP) Weeks 5-17 Conduct 2 observations Review Cycle I Alternative Certification Professional Development Plan (ACPDP) Week 18 Hold Cycle I Final Conference Develop Cycle II Alternative Certification Professional Development Plan (ACPDP)

All program leaders agree that the success of a support structure rests, fundamentally, on an environment of trust. Interns must continually give honest answers to the support providers' core question: "How are you doing?" Since candidates are simultaneously dealing with course work, teaching, supervision, and mentoring, everyone knows they are having a struggle. "In a traditional program, people expect your competencies to be there," says a graduate of Chico's program. "Here, supervisors know you will be floundering. I invited my supervisor to 'Come see my worst part of the day.' I was at four schools. She came to each one. She saw the diverse environments and knew my challenges. She understood. Then later, I said, 'Come again and see how much better I am doing.' There is no intimidation."

That sense of trust and bolstered confidence was echoed by a Georgia candidate: "From the beginning of the program, I felt I was set up to succeed."

On-Site Mentoring

While supervisors keep classroom practice grounded in course work, on-site mentors—"treasured advice givers," as one candidate called them—are critical to day-to-day survival. The programs pay strong attention to the selection and training of mentors, pay mentors a stipend, and are very clear about what is expected of them. (As an example, figure 8 is New York's mentor position description.) In Texas, mentors are selected by principals who receive guidance from Region XIII on what qualities to look for in a mentor. Mentors attend 15 hours of professional development provided by Region XIII. The mentor and each candidate must complete six observations during the school year—Region XIII suggests three times with the candidate observing the mentor and three with the mentor observing the candidate. In addition, the two also hold a minimum of four discussion meetings.

Georgia mentors—who are themselves classroom teachers—receive training on coaching and communication. They spend a minimum of 100 hours working with each candidate the first year and 50 hours the second year. One mentor responsibility is to support the candidate throughout all phases of the program by providing feedback based on the Danielson framework (see figure 6 on page 17).

Mentors in Hillsborough are former administrators. Not only do these individuals bring a wealth of expertise, but they have a vested interest in the district and can speak to principals and veteran teachers with the authority needed to make the candidates' lives easier. For example, candidates might be tempted to take on extra or peripheral responsibilities as good school citizens. Mentors would counsel principals to restrict such duties, to make candidates' experiences less taxing.

Peer Support

Besides this very direct support, successful alternative programs offer a more distanced yet crucial kind of support, in the form of seminars. Such seminars create a bridge—between theory and practice and also between the program's course work and its system of support. These sessions offer candidates the opportunity to share frustrations and engage in problem solving, not only with program faculty but with fellow candidates, whose insights come from being in the same boat. These kinds of discussions allow candidates to travel an arc: They take theory learned in course work, try it out with students, return to the group to analyze what succeeded or failed, get advice, and then go back and try again—each time growing in terms of teaching, reflection, and self-analysis.

Figure 8. New York City Mentor Position Description

VACANCY NOTICE New York Teaching Fellows Mentoring Program

POSITION: Teacher to serve as a Full Time Mentor Teacher—Elementary, IS/JHS/HS and Special Education for Teaching Fellows and other first year teachers with Transitional B Certification.

The New York City Teaching Fellows Full Time Mentor Model is designed to support and guide new teachers by having experienced colleagues serve as their mentors. The supportive, productive rapport between mentor and intern is intended to increase the new teacher's effectiveness and job satisfaction. At the same time, the mentor/teacher's role will enhance his/her professionalism by providing an opportunity to share successful practices.

LOCATION: Various locations throughout the City.

ELIGIBILITY: NYC licensed, tenured classroom teacher.

SELECTION CRITERIA: Minimum of five (5) years satisfactory teaching experience in the New York City Public Schools. Mastery of pedagogical and subject matter skills. Extensive knowledge of the new NYS and NYC performance standards and new assessments. Fluency in DOE regulations, policies and practices relative to content area. Demonstrated expertise in designing and implementing standards-based instruction. Exemplary knowledge about content, materials and methods that support high standards in various curriculum areas. Demonstrated capacity to serve as a catalyst for implementing instructional change in the classroom. Demonstrated understanding and experience in addressing the complexities of classroom life. Knowledge of staff development practices and in-service education. Record of engaging in cooperative and collaborative projects with staff/adults/administration. Evidence of excellent interpersonal relationship qualities. Demonstrated skill in team building and group dynamics. Experience in relating to adult learners. Evidence of excellent oral and written communication skills. Willingness to undergo additional training during the summer and throughout the year, as well as to travel among field locations. In certain collaborations, willingness to serve as adjunct faculty for collaborating college/university which may also require that candidates hold a Master's degree.

DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITES: Establish and maintain a trustful, confidential and non-evaluative relationship with intern. Serve as a Peer "Coach," providing opportunities for intervisitation, demonstrating /modeling and conferring with the intern. Develop and conduct a daily in-school program that is tailored to the beginning teacher's professional interest and concerns. Assist teachers in using collected data to work on the design and implementation of a comprehensive educational plan that focuses on high standards and achievement for all students including those who are LEP and/or receive special education services. Model appropriate and innovative teaching methodologies through techniques such as team teaching, demonstrations, simulations and consultations. Act as a liaison between the intern, entire school staff and the administration to promote the positive aspects of mentoring. Meet periodically with university faculty representatives. Promote collegiality through fostering an atmosphere of cooperation and communication among school personnel. Maintain and submit required documentation (mentoring plan, monthly log of mentoring activities, etc.).

Georgia offers an example of how such peer support operates. The RESA program makes available a series of professional, problem-based seminars. The seminars are facilitated by teachers with successful classroom experience, positive experience teaching adults, and expertise in particular specialty areas. Candidates are required to attend six seminars in the first year and four in the second year. If the support team determines that a candidate needs help with, say, behavior management, it recommends a classroom management seminar. The support comes in a form that is easy to digest, as well as relevant.


Engage in Continuous Reflection


All six of these programs are deeply attuned to outcomes. They take responsibility for preparing candidates to succeed in the classroom and to meet state certifi- cation or licensing requirements. They work with candidates, through training and support, to ensure that each candidate masters required skills and can demonstrate those skills on the job and in formal assessments. Moreover, the programs continually seek to improve outcomes, with a focus on how well they meet the needs of candidates and partner districts.

Assessing Candidate Performance

Alternative route programs focus squarely on candidates' on-the-job performance. "Traditional programs emphasize knowledge," says the coordinator of Hillsborough's program. "Our program is skill-based. During the whole year of the internship, we are seeing if the knowledge from course work is translating into a skill." This difference is evident across all six sites. Because candidates are classroom teachers fully in charge of groups of students, performance can be monitored over time, instruction is responsive to candidates' needs, and candidates have the opportunity to re-try strategies and re-teach material. As noted earlier, this kind of supportive assessment keeps candidates improving even as it keeps them afloat.

Programs vary in how they organize candidate assessment. Texas and Wichita incorporate performance tasks and work samples. New York's assessment mechanisms vary according to the university program in which candidates are placed. Virtually every program uses classroom observation to evaluate candidate performance. And three sites—Georgia, Hillsborough, and Chico—make extensive use of portfolios.

Ongoing formal observation in each program is accompanied by conferences with candidates and, often, written feedback as well. Programs like that in Texas' Region XIII deliberately emphasize formative observation, that is, classroom visits that are not used for evaluation. Most programs, however, include formal observation as part of the summative assessment required for teacher certification.

In Wichita, for example, mentor and administrator observations are required for certification. Mentors use an observation form adapted from the Professional Practice Scale published by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Hillsborough's three-cycle observation and coaching system, described earlier, includes 10 observations, three of which are formal (see figure 7, page 19). For each cycle, the candidate and school-based mentor teacher develop a candidate action plan to address areas of nonmastery, and observations during that cycle focus on those targeted areas. For example, in speci- fied weeks of the first cycle, the school-based mentor needs to conduct at least 2 observations that address competencies the candidate has not yet successfully demonstrated, while also noting whether the candidate continues to improve in areas of proficiency.

Another key assessment strategy is the use of portfolios, which are used for both formative assessment, as noted earlier, and summative assessment. For Georgia's portfolio, candidates amass evidence that demonstrates proficiency in 24 competencies (see figure 6, page 17). To show capability in planning and preparation, for example, they include lesson plans and graphic organizers. Showing skill in creating an appropriate classroom environment calls for video clips and classroom floor plans. Candidates gather three to four samples for each competency.

Given the level of time and effort that goes into creating the portfolios, the Georgia programs take great care in evaluating them. The program employs a part-time supervisor for just that job. Using a rubric to rate each competency, the evaluator provides candidates with feedback and submits documentation to the program coordinator. When all members of the candidate support team agree that a candidate is proficient in all 24 competencies, they each sign a competency completion form and submit it along with a recommendation for clear, renewable certification.

In Hillsborough, site principals oversee portfolios. Staff from the district's Office of Training and Staff Development orient each principal to the portfolio creation process, including a checklist of required items. Annual portfolio auditing is handled by educators hired as consultants and trained by project staff.

Evaluating Program Effectiveness

Assessment of candidate performance is only one anchor point in continuous program improvement. Programs also must routinely monitor whether they are meeting critical needs—those of the candidates themselves as well as those of partner districts and multiple stakeholders.

To evaluate overall effectiveness, programs systematically gather and analyze data using a variety of tools, including questionnaires for candidate needs assessment; surveys and interviews of principals; course effectiveness ratings by candidates; support provider ratings of candidates; and follow-up surveys after graduation of former candidates and their employers.

Responding to Candidate Needs

To identify candidate needs, for example, survey information from candidates often is gathered as early as the beginning of their preservice experience. In New York, for instance, candidates complete a "temperature gauge," an online survey asking them to evaluate their first three weeks of preservice training, including course content and advisory time. The results allow staff to follow up with candidates as needed and to make adjustments that might improve their experiences for the remainder of preservice. A follow-up survey gauges how successful the adjustments have been.

Chico candidates fill out a pre-entry questionnaire to help staff accommodate their experience and characteristics. Instructors then conduct a candidate needs analysis at the beginning of each course to help them tailor instruction. At the end of each course, candidates let instructors know how well the course met their needs in terms of increased proficiency.

Region XIII in Texas, like several other programs, surveys its candidates at the end of the program on a wide range of issues. Questions cover the program's overall performance, the quality of the training, the caliber of support from mentors and supervisors, and candidates' expectations for the future. Texas and Chico survey candidates and their employers after graduation.

Data collected on the needs of candidates and local districts are used to continually improve every aspect of the programs. When candidates in Wichita, for example, reported strongly valuing the feedback on their teaching provided by their support providers and said they wanted more, the program increased the number of support-provider visits to classrooms. Most candidates now receive at least 10 visits in the school year and get written feedback from each. The program also accommodated candidates' logistical problems by purchasing new technology that allows candidates at remote sites to participate in classes via the Internet by streaming video rather than drive hundreds of miles.

One measure of success is the rate of program completion. Chico, for one, has seen its candidate retention rate rise from 86 percent of the cumulative pool of those who had completed the program in 1999-2000 to 91 percent in 2003-04. Program leaders credit their focus on gathering data and responding to them. It's important to note that the data are not just quantitative, says Chico's evaluator. "We try to collect candidates' voices. The survey at the end of each class is not just their rating but their words and their emotions connected to this course experience. Honesty is important. We break down the objectives of the courses and ask what students are not feeling satisfied with." Instructors see the exact words of the students at multiple points in the curriculum and use that feedback for tailoring. Coordinators, too, look at all the feedback and routinely revisit the question of curriculum sequence.

Responding to Regional Needs

Meanwhile, to stay on top of the changing needs of partner school districts and other local stakeholders, each program does yet another level of needs assessment. Chico, for example, regularly draws on information from a wide range of informants (see figure 9 for Chico's map of its multiple evaluation strands). One group is its advisory board, whose members-including local school officials, parents, and representatives from local special education support agencies -keep a finger on the region's pulse. Further information comes from supervisors. Because they are constantly in contact with school and county office administrators, their meetings frequently raise triggers for program change. Moreover, a number of part-time university faculty are also teachers in the public schools, affording yet another level of feedback. And because program leaders are almost constantly writing grants, formal surveys and interviews of local participants—including all 385 principals—provide further, up-to-date data.

Chico's regional needs assessment has led over time to shifts in the program's emphasis. For example, more attention has been paid to autism in recent years as that disability has become more prevalent. The program has shifted from an early focus on elementary, multiple-subject teaching to middle and high school teaching as the need for special education teachers at those levels has expanded. And the search for more candidates interested in serving students with moderate to severe disabilities remains a priority, in response to greater need.

Figure 9. Chico Continuous Improvement Cycle

CSU, Chico Special Education Outcomes Evaluation and Curriculum Development A Continuous Improvement Cycle Entry Surveys Needs Analyses In-course Feedback Assessing prior knowledge and experience Immediate course adaptation to current learner needs Formative Effectiveness Ratings (Administered in every course and supervision) immediate revision of course or supervision for subsequent term   data accumulated for annual analysis of program curriculum     Annual Exit Survey Annual revision of curriculum and instruction, emphases, program services Candidate's dossiers/portfolios Advisory Board Annual Survey Graduate Follow-up Survey (1-3 years after completion) Employee Follow-up Survey (Rates graduate on-the-job)

Program leaders in Georgia see responsiveness to district needs as a way to model for candidates how good teachers assess and respond to student needs. They believe that one reason their program has enjoyed so much success is that the people involved, from the top down, truly value an open exchange of ideas. Program leaders know local school needs because they ask-and then they listen and act. For example, this process has led to adding strands in early childhood and special education.

Program Improvement Over Time

It's clear that continuous program improvement depends on committed, collaborative leadership and inclusive decision-making. In Texas's Region XIII program, analysis of all data collected is done at an annual retreat. Staff members get together for two days each year to analyze what is working well and what they want to improve. They pride themselves on being able to "turn on a dime" to make changes.

In New York, an advisory board consisting of program participants from each partner university works closely with the program directors and the chancellor. For the first couple of years, the focus was on the quality of what the university offered the candidates. Today the emphasis has shifted to encompass broader issues of the teaching experience in New York classrooms to continually address ways to support quality teaching.

Chico, at this point, is reaping the rewards of its years of careful development. It has enjoyed sustained leadership with its current director and other key leaders in place for more than a dozen years. During that time, the program has developed a deep base of expertise that constitutes its support network. Many of today's supervisors were once candidates themselves. Many returned to enroll in the university's master's program-for which 15 of their candidate credits applied. Often long-time residents, support providers understand the rural context and the needs of local schools.

A point of pride for all involved is that the Chico program has begun to have an effect beyond special education. "I see other teachers coming by when I come to a school," says one supervisor. "Staff in three or four other classes begin taking on the traits of the special education teacher who is doing a wonderful job-because of the supportive model." Seeing that the program's candidates bring cutting-edge skills to their sites, a number of administrators tap them to do consultations and modeling with other teachers, for example, or to present at board meetings.

The first part of this guide has presented some crosscutting design elements of a strong alternative teacher preparation program. The next part more fully describes each program, giving readers six variations of how these elements mesh to support the development of successful teachers.

PART II: PROGRAM PROFILES
Alternative Certification Program, Hillsborough County, Florida

Certification/Degree	Elementary Secondary
Partners	School District of Hillsborough County
Program Initiated	1998
Total Program Graduates	530
2004 Candidate Cohort	Rolling admission; no cohort
Candidate Demographics	59% Female 41% Male 71% White 18% Afr. Am. 8% Hispanic 3% Asian Am. (2003 data)
Program Duration	1–2 years
Cost per Candidate/Who Pays	$1,600 District pays $800 Candidate pays $800

To address growing shortages of qualified teachers, while providing the best education opportunities for all students, the School District of Hillsborough County (SDHC) created its Alternative Certification Program (ACP) offering teaching and training opportunities to non-education majors. In the 1980s, Florida’s State Department of Education had put alternative programs in the state universities, but over time it became clear that the alternatives were no longer alternative. According to SDHC’s director of training and staff development, these alternatives had "folded right into the university as a straight graduate program." In 1997, the legislature decided to give districts the option of creating their own alternative programs. Hillsborough’s program was created in 1998-1999.

SDHC’s general hiring practice for a long time was to first seek experienced teachers from other districts, then experienced teachers from other states, followed by student teachers, and, finally, alternative route teachers. The director of training and staff development says this was a hold-over from the 1980s when alternative certification was seen as a place for "leftover hippies." In ACP’s early stages, she says, school administrators were poorly disposed to its graduate teachers, many of whom got the "cold shoulder." But as administrators saw classrooms that would be teacherless at the start of the school year, they accepted ACP teachers. Enough ACP teachers have since joined SDHC schools and been successful that administrators no longer shun alternative certification candidates.

ACP initially focused on math and science, and served "infield" candidates, which meant that if a candidate’s degree major was in chemistry, then that is what he or she taught. Candidates went through the ACP to gain pedagogical knowledge and relied upon their university experience for the content in the subject they would be teaching. Three years later, however, the program was expanded to serve charter school teachers and "out-of-field" candidates—those who wanted to teach a specific subject, such as math, but did not have the college course work to support that choice. Ultimately, out-of-field participants are responsible for gaining content-area knowledge for the field in which they want to teach by taking university courses, and the ACP is responsible for the pedagogy and teaching methods portion of the certification.

ACP candidates have two years to complete the program, but most need only one year. Those who take two years do so on the recommendation of their mentor or building principal, who feels that the added time with ACP support and supervision will benefit the candidate. To gain Florida certification, the candidates must complete the SDHC ACP, pass a state General Knowledge Exam, the Florida Educator Examination, and the Florida Subject Area Exam, and meet the requirements of state law.

Recruitment and Selection

The district runs 6 to 10 ACP evening informational meetings each year, and in the summer it hosts two large ACP recruitment fairs. Approximately 900 people attend these sessions. On occasion, the program will get news coverage, which frequently results in several calls to the office of Training and Staff Development the next day.

Since its inception in 1989, 1,327 candidates have been accepted into the SDHC ACP, and the program has grown over 300 percent in the past five years. Of the 530 teachers certified since 1998, 87 percent remain in the district. One ACP staff member says the program’s biggest appeal is its accessible nature and low cost. ACP candidates can enter the program at any time during the year, once they have been hired. This makes midyear candidates eligible for support and instruction once they enter the classroom, as opposed to waiting until the fall.

Candidate Training: Content and Pedagogy

The ACP recommends a 180-day completion timeline for the program’s two components, course work and field work (the internship year), each completed in conjunction with the other. Eight required courses are based upon the 12 Accomplished Practices established by the Florida Department of Education:

1. Teacher Induction/Classroom Management (18 hours)— based on Harry Wong’s The First Days of School.

2. Professionalism Through Integrity: Code of Ethics (3 hours)—training component based on the Florida Department of Education’s Code of Ethics and Principles of Professional Conduct.

3. Transition Into Teaching (24—30 hours)—examines the developmental needs of K-12 students and strategies to meet those needs.

4. Effective Teaching Strategies (18—24 hours)—focuses on the six domains of the Florida Performance Measurement System (FPMS).

5. Instructional Strategies Through Cooperative Learning (24 hours)—based upon the work of Johnson and Johnson and Spencer Kagan, and presents knowledge, skills, and strategies to implement cooperative learning.

6. Integrating Technology in Education (15 hours)— emphasizes ways to use technology in the classroom.

7. Crisis Intervention for Educators (3 hours)—video—based course designed to help educators recognize the signs of emotional distress, behavior indicators of physical and emotional abuse, drug and alcohol abuse, and neglect.

8. English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) Independent Reading Course (3 hours)—provides ESOL awareness for educators.

These courses help participants gain the knowledge, skills, and abilities required to successfully demonstrate each of the components in the 12 Accomplished Practices. Course work is aimed at all levels and is non-subject-specific, with the exception of the ESOL course that addresses the needs of English language learners in the district.

Course work is completed in three places concurrently with field work. Teacher Induction and Professionalism Through Integrity are offered through the district’s New Teacher Orientation. Crisis Intervention for Educators and ESOL courses are offered through independent study on the participant’s campus. The remaining courses are completed through district-sponsored classes. There is no specific order in which classes must be completed, but there are obvious benefits to taking specific classes (e.g., Teacher Induction) early in the process.

Teachers employed by the district, trained in professional development, teach the ACP courses during evenings or on weekends. One trainer comments that being in the classroom all day helps her to bond with the ACP candidates because they are in the same boat as her students—"tired and exhausted from the day, but excited to be learning new things!"

Within the field work component of the program, a three-cycle observation process takes place over 36 weeks focusing on the instructional performance of the candidate (see figure 7). This includes a minimum of seven data collection observations, three "formal" observations, and work with a mentor to ensure the candidate is making progress. The observation cycle, which includes specific tasks that must be completed, is conducted by the ACP mentor in addition to the internal support staff observations.

Candidates are also required to develop a portfolio. The school administrator is in charge of the portfolio process and works closely with the candidate teacher and the ACP staff. The school administrator also works with the candidate teacher’s mentor to gather evidence, becomes knowledgeable about the guidelines and methods of documentation of accomplished practices, and distributes and collects the ESOL and CRISIS Intervention test. It is up to each administrator to work with each candidate individually to support the cycle of the program he or she is in. One principal commented, "It is a lot of work to plan it out for each teacher; it’s tough, but the benefits make it worth it."

Mentoring, Supervision, and Support

The mentoring component was added to the ACP in 2000 based on the Steve Barkley coaching and mentoring model. ACP mentors are intended to be friends, coaches, and support people who are nonjudgmental, understanding, and nonthreatening. These external mentors are experienced administrators formerly employed by SDHC. As former administrators, they come with training and experience in teacher support and evaluation. On occasion, university personnel have acted as ACP mentors, but with limited success. One ACP staff member hypothesizes that previous administrators possess a "commitment to the organization" that people outside the district may not have, and she screens for these characteristics in choosing mentors. Another bonus of using past administrators is that they have the respect and authority to speak to another principal "administrator to administrator" as they observe and advocate for the candidate teacher.

Mentors typically work with 12 to 15 candidate teachers at a time and are generally assigned to the same campuses or those close to each other to minimize travel in such a large county district. Their role is to act as a liaison between the teacher, the campus support team, and the Office of Training and Staff Development. They also fill in the information gaps for any course work that the candidate has yet to complete. Visits typically last an hour and mentors are paid $60 per visit and their travel costs. Mentors work approximately three days a week, meeting with four to five candidates a day.

Observations are based on the Florida Performance Measurement System, a screening and observation instrument tied to the 12 Accomplished Practices. Using the information gained from this instrument, mentors can recommend additional professional development, set up a model lesson, organize departmental support, and offer praise to candidate teachers. Mentors also review lesson plans, grade-book protocol, classroom management skills, and other district-based processes the candidate might be struggling with.

Mentors advocate for their candidate teachers in many ways. They review the candidates’ schedule to ensure that it is conducive to the needs of a new teacher, they keep an eye out for too many duties beyond the classroom, and they make sure that teachers are not "coerced" into accepting sponsorship positions such as cheerleading or other school clubs. Mentors frequently will go to the administrator and lobby to have changes made if they feel the candidate teacher is overloaded with a difficult schedule or too many duties.

Funding

The ACP program is funded mostly with State Categorical Teacher Training funds and a few grants. Title I funds can also be used. SDHC receives $2.5 million each year from the state to run the program. The program cost per candidate is $1,600, which includes materials. SDHC and the candidate each pay $800. An ACP manager estimates that while tuition will rise, the program will remain extremely competitive with university programs that charge about $3,000 for certification.

Success Indicators

Between July 1998 and June 2004, 530 teachers have completed the ACP, with 87 percent remaining in the district. The overall completion rate of candidates is 98 percent and the retention rate is 85 percent.

Key Success Factors

SDHC ACP offers a flexible, low-cost method for non-education majors to enter the teaching field quickly. Based on lessons learned, program officers stress the following:

• Have "buy-in" from administrators, human resources, and district staff development teams before starting up. Building principals who will host the candidates need to believe in the program; the human resources department, which hires the teachers, needs to be kept in the loop, especially if it deals with certification issues; and district staff development teams need to know the weaknesses of the candidates and be prepared to offer assistance or additional professional development
• Be willing to make courses accessible and change them yearly to meet the needs of candidates. Host courses all over the district and at schools that are hosting other evening programs so that you can "cost share" to have a location open at night
• An assessment process is important. Rely upon portfolios, mentor feedback, and course work results to guide the program
• Have the "behind-the-scenes" data system set up before you begin. You cannot do things manually; work closely with your technology department so that the technology can work for you.
• Reevaluate the program continuously. Provide obvious steps for completion and "next steps" to the participants. Rely upon administrator and teacher surveys for feedback. This ensures that you will continue to meet the needs of your teachers, principals, and district as times changes.

Educator Certification Program, Region XIII, Austin, Texas

Certification/Degree	Elementary Secondary Special Education Bilingual Education
Partners	Region XIII Education Service Center Region XIII School Districts
Program Initiated	1989
Total Program Graduates	2,082
2004 Candidate Cohort	236
Candidate Demographics	79% Female 21% Male Majority are White (2003 data)
Program Duration	17 months
Cost per Candidate/Who Pays	$5,200 Candidate pays

Like so many other alternative route programs, the initial driver for creating the Educator Certification Program (ECP) was a shortage of teachers with qualifications in certain certification areas. In 1989, the most critical shortages for the 59 school districts in and around Austin, Texas, were in special education. To help remedy this situation, the Region XIII Education Service Center (ESC) created an opportunity for professionals from many different fields to become special education teachers. This ESC, which serves the 16-county Austin area, is one of 20 such agencies created by the Texas legislature to function as intermediaries between the Texas Education Agency and local school districts.

The program underwent a major redesign in 1991. One of the most important changes was a switch from holding classes during the day to meeting in the evenings and on weekends. Daytime classes had forced districts to hire substitutes to fill in for the candidates while they attended classes. Night and weekend classes allow candidates to be with their own students as much as possible. The program also expanded the types of credentials offered to include bilingual and secondary education. The changes res