1. State Examples and Follow-up Data Requests for SOQ Proposals
April 24, 2019
Dr. Jennifer Piver-Renna
Director of Research

2. Overview Update on distribution of teachers by qualifications
Overview of STEM Retention Grants impact data
State case studies: Mentoring/coaching programs
State case studies: Tiered licensure and teacher leader programs

3. Distribution of Teacher Qualifications in Virginia
Teachers Not Properly Licensed or Endorsed
Provisionally Licensed Teachers
New Teachers (1st or 2nd year)
National Board Certified Teachers
All
Core
All Schools
2.1%
1.6%
7.0%
8.2%
1.7%
High Poverty
(≥ 75% free- and reduced-price lunch)
2.5%
2.2%
9.3%
12.1%
1.2%
Low Poverty
(≤ 25% free- and reduced-price lunch)
2.7%
7.2%
6.7%
2.3%
High Minority
(≥ 75% non-white)
2.4%
9.2%
11.3%
Low Minority
(≤ 25% non-white)
1.0%
6.4%
6.0%
1.4%
Accredited
2.0%
7.6%
1.8%
Not Accredited
3.3%
11.2%
12.7%
Source: Virginia Department of Education, school year

4. STEM Teacher Recruitment and Retention Incentives
Provides funding to attract, recruit, retain high-quality diverse individuals to teach STEM subjects in middle and high schools
Since , eligible teachers were provided $5,000 for the first year and $1,000 for up to three additional years ($8,000 total)
For , eligible teachers could receive $5,000 per year for three years ($15,000 total)
3 years of data available on , , cohorts:
Metric
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Average percent retained in STEM area
90%
82%
74%
Average percent retained in same school
83%
67%
55%
Source: Virginia Department of Education, Master Schedule Collection

5. Induction and Mentoring Programs
Four common components of statewide mentoring programs:
Include state funding for mentor stipends
Establish state-level program standards while allowing for local flexibility
Provide state-level mentor training
Track program implementation, quality, and outcomes
Five program practices having the strongest research evidence:
At least two years of comprehensive induction support
Rigorous requirements for mentor selection
Full-time mentors who are released of classroom duties
Assigned mentor
Weekly contact between mentors and beginning teachers
Source: Appalachia Regional Comprehensive Center

6. State Example: Texas Beginning Teacher Induction and Mentoring Program
Goal to improve beginning teacher retention and performance
Targeted school districts with high rates of teacher attrition, beginning teachers, and teaching outside of certification area
Funds used for professional development and stipends for mentor teachers and substitute pay; most grantees spent less than $4,000 per beginning teacher (20% local match required)
Program outcomes:
Positive impact on beginning teacher job satisfaction
Beginning teacher retention similar to state-wide average
Nearly half of participating beginning teachers attributed their decision to remain in teaching to their mentor

7. State Example: Florida and Illinois’s Investing in Innovation Grant
Program provides all first- and second-year teachers two years of one-on-one mentoring up to four times a month
Mentors are rigorously-selected, mentor no more than 15 beginning teachers full-time, and receive over 100 hours of training
Program outcomes:
Significant, positive impacts on achievement in both reading and mathematics observed for students of teachers who received mentoring services
Scored similar to other teachers on measures of classroom management and quality of instruction
Similar rates of retention after three years of teaching as teachers receiving typical district supports

8. State Example: Connecticut’s Teacher Education and Mentoring Program
Program goal is to engage teachers in purposeful exploration of professional practice through guided support
Beginning teachers work with a rigorously-selected mentor to reflect on their practice, analyze student data, and identify areas for growth and improvement
Mentors receive a stipend of $500 to $1,000 per each assigned beginning teacher
Program outcomes based on a survey of participants:
Beginning teachers received 1-2 hours per week of face-to-face support from mentors
Beginning teachers report work with mentor improved their teaching practice and directly affected their decision to remain in teaching

9. Tiered Teacher Licensure Structures
30 states have licensing systems that allow teachers to advance beyond a standard professional license
17 of those require evidence for effectiveness for teachers to obtain an advanced license, such as student growth or teacher performance evaluations
Only one ties additional compensation to the licensure tiers at the state level
Source: Education Commission of the States

10. State Example: Ohio’s Tiered Certification System
Goal is to provide opportunities for teachers to advance their professional careers and serve as school improvement leaders, without leaving the teaching profession
Recognized by the National Council on Teacher Quality as a best practice
Adds two advanced tiers to initial and professional license:
Senior Professional Educator: master’s degree; nine years of experience; demonstration of effective practice
Lead Professional Educator: master’s degree; nine years of experience; demonstration of effective practice; National Board certification or teacher leader endorsement
Advanced license types offer advanced steps on career ladders, resulting in additional compensation

11. State Teacher Leader Programs
47% of states offer formal supports and/or incentives for teacher leaders
Examples include financial incentives, reduced workload, participation in state advisory committees, and professional development
43% of states offer a teacher leader license or endorsement
33% of states have adopted teacher leader standards
About half develop their own, and half have adopted or adapted the Teacher Leader Model Standards developed by the Teacher Leadership Exploratory Consortium
25% of states define the role of teacher leaders in statute or regulation
Duties include mentoring/coaching, participating in school-level decision making and vision-setting, and advocating for students and the profession
Source: Education Commission of the States

12. State Example: Iowa’s Teacher Leadership and Compensation Program
Goal is to provide career pathways and compensation structures to attract, retain, and reward effective teachers
Every district submits a plan with the following must-haves:
Minimum salary of $33,500 for all full-time teachers
“Improved entry into the profession”: coaching, mentoring, and observational opportunities for new teachers
Differentiated, multiple, meaningful teacher leadership roles for at least 25 percent of the teacher workforce
Rigorous selection process for leadership roles:
Criteria based on effectiveness and professional growth
Annual review of assignment
Experience – 3 years of total experience, 1 year in school district

13. State Example: Iowa’s Teacher Leadership and Compensation Program
Program defines six areas of allowable funds:
To raise salaries to the $33,500 minimum
Provide salary and/or supplements for teacher leaders
To cover salary and benefits for positions hired to replace teachers who are released
To cover substitute teacher costs for observations, team meetings, and professional development
For teacher leader professional development
To pay for books, resources, or technology for teacher leaders
Funds are distributed to districts through a higher per-pupil cost
Other features: annual report with local goals and evidence; program transparency; online community

14. State Example: Iowa’s Teacher Leadership and Compensation Program
Program effectiveness assessed through district-created annual goals and American Institutes for Research (AIR) evaluation
In the third year of implementation, from annual reports:
Greater than 80% of school districts fully or mostly met their attract and retain goal, their collaboration goals, and their professional growth goals
56% of school districts fully or mostly met their achievement goals
In the third year of implementation, from AIR:
Teacher perceptions of program’s impact on instruction and working conditions is high (greater than 80%) and has increased over time
78% of teachers agreed that the program impacted their desire to return to school next year
No change in teacher retention or student achievement in the first three years compared to baseline