Maryland s Alternative Route to Certification Options MARCO Funded through USDOE Transition to Teaching Program

1. Maryland�s Alternative Route to Certification Options (MARCO)Funded through USDOE Transition to Teaching Program Effecting Program and Policy With Use of Evaluation Data

2. Dr. Virginia Pilato, Project Directorvpilato@msde.state.md.usMichelle Dunkle, Project Managermdunkle@msde.state.md.usDr. George Funaro, Project Evaluatorgjfunaro@comcast.net

3. Setting the Stage Maryland, an import state, faces a yearly deficit of highly qualified teachers; The Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) has assumed responsibility for enlarging the pool of teachers certified through alternative means; MSDE has taken the lead in seeking to enhance interstate mobility of teachers� certification.

4. Pivotal Points USDOE-sponsored Transition to Teaching Grant (MARCO) Designed to explore what works in alternative preparation programs USDOE Troops to Teachers Grant Designed to uncover barriers and best-practices to interstate certification reciprocity and develop new programs in Maryland for Troops to Teachers and other career changers Broadened State regulation and guidelines supporting and guiding alternative preparation routes to certification Intended to ensure high quality programs that attract high-quality candidates Requires Program Approval for all such training activities in partnerships that must include a school system

5. What is MARCO? Integrated preparation program for alternatively training teachers for certification Designed to be a model for state and national replication Features: Online pre-employment training Summer teaching internship Mentoring throughout year one of teaching

6. Why MARCO? High state and national interest in alternative routes to certification Local interest in and subsequent changes to state �alternative route� regulations, due to increasing state need for teachers Emerging criticism of reciprocity issues for teachers trained in alternative programs demanding demonstrable high-quality programs

7. Three-part Evaluation Design Basic program quantitative outputs Basic program qualitative outcomes Institutional support systems

8. Program Outputs Recruited candidates for high-needs teaching areas Recruited increasing number of minority candidates Demonstrated retention of MARCO teachers

9. Program Outputs 2003-2005 Recruited strong candidates for high-needs teaching areas: Candidates possessing graduate degrees increase each year; most are from business/industry; income level in prior occupation has increased substantially. Recruited increasing number of minority candidates: Females continue to outnumber males 4/1; however, while African Americans numbered slightly fewer in 2003 to Caucasians, they now outnumber Caucasians 2/1. Demonstrated retention of MARCO teachers: Teachers are required to give three years of service; retention data will be more significant in fourth year of project; 96% remain currently.

10. Program Outcomes Positive response to training components emphasizing effective integration of all components Pre-employment online training Summer internship experience Useful first-year mentoring

11. Pre-employment Online Training Surveys indicated: All cohort value on-line convenience. All agreed that volume of work was overwhelming with inadequate feedback. All suggested opportunities for stronger interaction between cohort members and instructors. Cohorts requested meetings among themselves as possible for �support group� relationship. Cohorts noted redundancy of topics in the on-line program itself as well as between the program and the internship training components.

12. Summer Internship Experience Surveys indicated: Consistently rated outstanding. Highly valued were opportunities for practical, hands-on, real teacher-real kids aspects. Cohorts held highest regard for programs facilitators and their colleagues! Too much to absorb in too little time More care should be taken in selecting teachers to be shadowed and those teachers� understanding of the MARCO program.

13. Useful first-year mentoring Judged essentially helpful. A number strongly felt more was needed earlier in the year. Staff development rated above average, but more needed in content-related instruction and classroom management.

14. Mentor Responses to Surveys Mentors rated � of MARCO teachers above average compared with other first-year teachers; 1/5 rated as superior to them. Mentors recommend continuing program activities into second year emphasizing student-centered instructional strategies, classroom culture, and classroom management. Mentors report that the teachers judge the internship experience to exceptionally valuable, with on-line training less so. Without exception, mentors stressed the need for more knowledge of and involvement in the MARCO pre-service program (on-line work and internship) in order to relate what actually happens in the first year of teaching to the training meant to prepare teachers for that first year.

15. Principals� Ratings MARCO teachers: rated much better than average after first year of teaching; are more mature, self-assured, and more competent; possess strong academic content and good grasp of local curriculum; Need more classroom management training and student-centered learning strategies.

16. Institutional Support Systems Surveyed, in addition to cohorts, principals and mentors: State Superintendent of Schools President of University School system superintendent Program coordinators from two universities and school system Project Director and Project Manager from State

17. Program changes resulting from evaluation Pre-employment training modules have been redesigned in collaboration with school system Program Facilitator and university mentors to align content. Principals now sit on the Steering Committee Roles of each stakeholder for data collection is clarified. Communication of policies and procedures with cohorts is improved through face-to-face and heightened email and Blackboard chat rooms. Facilitators for Internships Experience continue their support throughout the first year. Program is now seamless in content from training through internship into teaching and encompassing mentoring component.

18. What did we learn and how are we using it? Success follows when the goal is to identify what works and what does not, when focus is on addressing and responding to relevant and practical concerns, when all parties are convinced that the goal is to improve program and not ascribe blame, and When a high level of trust and ownership on behalf of everyone is established.

19. What else? MARCO is redefining traditional roles of major stakeholders : College, from primary actor in pre-service teacher education to secondary but important role of developer and disseminator of research-based best practices; Schools and school system, from secondary role in pre-service teacher training to that of the primary force in determining training content based on system needs; State Department of Education, from overseeing grant expenditures to becoming leading participant in stakeholders� role change process and interlocuter for decisions affecting program offerings and program quality.

20. Role redefinition is possible because: State Superintendent, University Provosts, and Chief Academic Office of School System buy into it, enabling, and requiring: Single locus point for administrative responsibility at the school system instead of bifurcated dual points; Upgraded internal accountability at on-line university brought MARCO from periphery to mainstream of university activities; Mentoring that is integrated with all aspects of the program; An integrated non-duplicative university/school training curriculum, totally performance and outcomes-based.

21. When does evaluation make a difference: When highly-placed and politically influential individuals such as a state superintendent and a university president demand honest responses to state needs; When the stakeholders to a project decide that evaluation learning will be integral to program improvement at every stage; When a school system brokers its need for �highly qualified� into a program of high quality; When universities recognize both the need for supportive state policy as well as school system demands for help and decide to become partners instead of competitors. When project leadership is forceful, yet diplomatic.

22. As a result of lessons learned, what now? By January 2007, all alternative route preparation programs will need to acquire Maryland Program Approval; will be exclusively performance- and outcomes-based; must include an internship; must include mentoring directly linked to training and internship content; must include in any partnership among providers the local school system that will hire the trained teacher as the primary determinant of program content for the training based on classroom needs in that system; Must collect and submit ongoing data regarding program on a yearly basis.

23. Questions? Comments?